Why do we have to argue with religious people?

Really people, I don't get what's the point in arguing with really religious people... is like yelling at deaf people. Is as useful as praying for atheists to become catholics. I guess the only way we could make a difference is if people are willing to hear reasons, to make our schools teach science, to educate instead of preaching.

So why do we have to use our energy in people who doesn't deserve it? Why not trying to change through "real" ways as banning intelligent desing in our schools or banning catholic lessons in our junior highs?

Replies to This Discussion

We argue with theists because it's slowly but surely creating more of us and other Atheists need to see us being strong examples so they are less afraid to come out into the open with their Atheism.

Dan Barker, the co-president of Freedom From Religion Foundation, used to be an evangelical preacher and now he's one of the most well known Atheists there are! :) We MUST debate. If an evangelical preacher can be shown the way back from the dark world of religion....so can many, many others.

It is possible to sway people, not overnight perhaps, but we can plant seeds. The trick, in my experience, is to play upon the better nature of others. Christianity is evil. (among many other religions) To be a Christian, one must refer to a being who allows other beings to be tortured forever 'good'. In a non-religious context, almost everyone understands that such a being would be a monster. We need to point out the double standard, and call upon the better nature of the Christian to stop defending the indefensible. Don't let Christians and others set Hell aside, as they tend to do. Make sure it comes up in any discussion of their religion, and make them feel ashamed of themselves for endorsing a being that would create it. There are other moral problems with religion apart from Hell, of course, but this is a moral no-brainer. We CAN sway people if we don't demean them, and if we speak to their harts as well as their minds.

It may sound crazy, but i wouldn't be so displeased with such exam. Of course, 100% is asking too much. Maybe with some easy questions just to prove everyone knows what are we talking about. Of course, that exam is senseless... but we do it in college lectures sometimes, don't we?

But the point in my question is not that, is why should we spend energy talking of something to someone who won't hear our reasons and could possibly hurt us for expressing ourselves.